MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392368241 · doi:10.1145/3616855.3635859

MultiFS: Automated Multi-Scenario Feature Selection in Deep Recommender Systems

2024· article· en· W4392368241 on OpenAlexaff
Dugang Liu, Chaohua Yang, Xing Tang, Yejing Wang, Fuyuan Lyu, Weihong Luo, Xiuqiang He, Zhong Ming, Xiangyu Zhao

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRecommender Systems and Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersHong Kong Institute for Data ScienceNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaInnovation and Technology FundUniversitas BrawijayaImpact FundCity University of Hong KongAromatic Plant Research Center
KeywordsComputer scienceRecommender systemFeature (linguistics)Bridge (graph theory)Feature selectionArtificial intelligenceMachine learningSelection (genetic algorithm)Data mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multi-scenario recommender systems (MSRSs) have been increasingly used in real-world industrial platforms for their excellent advantages in mitigating data sparsity and reducing maintenance costs. However, conventional MSRSs usually use all relevant features indiscriminately and ignore that different kinds of features have varying importance under different scenarios, which may cause confusion and performance degradation. In addition, existing feature selection methods for deep recommender systems may lack the exploration of scenario relations. In this paper, we propose a novel automated multi-scenario feature selection (MultiFS) framework to bridge this gap, which is able to consider scenario relations and utilize a hierarchical gating mechanism to select features for each scenario. Specifically, MultiFS first efficiently obtains feature importance across all the scenarios through a scenario-shared gate. Then, some scenario-specific gate aims to identify feature importance to individual scenarios from a subset of the former with lower importance. Subsequently, MultiFS imposes constraints on the two gates to make the learning mechanism more feasible and combines the two to select exclusive features for different scenarios. We evaluate MultiFS and demonstrate its ability to enhance the multi-scenario model performance through experiments over two public multi-scenario benchmarks.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.267 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRecommender Systems and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207